Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (2.48 seconds)
Documents citing (07/2012) Matrimony.Com Limited vs Google Llc & Others (30/2012) Consumer ... on 31 January, 2018

Meta Platforms Inc vs Competition Commission Of India & Ors on 4 November, 2025

- all that is shown is that both mediums of advertising can be done by the same party and on the same web page, not that they are substitutable overall. 145.10 Google itself has been found to be dominant in the online search advertisement market in In Re: Matrimony.com Limited v. Google LLC & Ors. Case No. 07 of 2012 (Paras 20-21 and 103-106) and CUTS v. Google LLC & Ors. Case No. 30 of 2012. The assessment has to be done in the context of overall information available on record and the corresponding market reality, and not on the basis of submissions of one or two parties.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 59 - Cited by 0 - A Bhushan - Full Document

Whatsapp Llc vs Competition Commission Of India on 4 November, 2025

- all that is shown is that both mediums of advertising can be done by the same party and on the same web page, not that they are substitutable overall. 145.10 Google itself has been found to be dominant in the online search advertisement market in In Re: Matrimony.com Limited v. Google LLC & Ors. Case No. 07 of 2012 (Paras 20-21 and 103-106) and CUTS v. Google LLC & Ors. Case No. 30 of 2012. The assessment has to be done in the context of overall information available on record and the corresponding market reality, and not on the basis of submissions of one or two parties.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 59 - Cited by 0 - A Bhushan - Full Document

Google Llc vs Drs Logistics (P) Ltd. & Ors on 10 August, 2023

50. He also referred to the decision in the case of Matrimony.com Limited v. Google LLC &Ors.22, in support of his contention that 22 2018 SCC OnLine CCI 1 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT FAO(OS)(COMM) 2/2022 & FAO(OS) (COMM) 22/2022 Page 23 of 95 RAWAL Signing Date:10.08.2023 allowing the use of trademarked terms as keywords has been held to be pro-competition by the Competition Commission of India.
Delhi High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 0 - V Bakhru - Full Document

Matrimony.Com Limited vs . Google Llc & Others) And Vide Its Order ... on 28 November, 2024

In this regard, the Commission notes that in its order dated 20.10.2022 in Google Android Case, it has extensively examined the issue of sideloading, while deliberating upon the conduct of Google in the Android ecosystem. Consequently, the Commission issued a directive requiring Google to not restrict the ability of app developers, in any manner, to distribute their apps through side-loading. The Hon'ble NCLAT vide its judgment dated 29.03.2023 while upholding the majority of the Commission's order has set aside the said direction of the Commission. This matter is currently sub-judice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the Commission is not inclined to entertain the allegations of the Informant related to sideloading, at this stage.
Competition Commission of India Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Drs Logistics (P) Ltd & Another vs Google India Pvt Ltd & Anr on 30 October, 2021

122. Mr. Sethi has also placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Matrimony.com Ltd. (supra) of Competition Commission of India to contend that Google keyword bidding process promotes competition and provides some benefits and choice as compared to traditional advertising. To this submission, Mr. Sethi has accepted the fact that the trademark can be used as a keyword to divert the traffic from the website of the owner to that of the advertiser to encourage competition this according to this Court may in a given case amount to infringement and / or passing off.
Delhi High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 2 - V K Rao - Full Document
1   2 Next